Expanding the Possible: What’s New and Upcoming in Standards and

Technologies for Publishing

Nettie Lagace, NISO (@abugseye)SSP 36th Annual Meeting, Boston

May 29, 2014

What’s NISO?

• Non-profit industry trade association accredited by ANSI with 150+ members

• Mission of developing and maintaining standards related to information, documentation, discovery and distribution of published materials and media

• Represent US interests to ISO TC46 (Information and Documentation) and also serve as Secretariat for ISO TC46/SC 9 (Identification and Description)

• Volunteer driven organization: 400+ spread out across the world

Holdings Statements for Bibliographic ItemsPrinted Information on SpinesSingle-Tier Steel Bracket Library ShelvingData Elements for Binding Library MaterialsInformation Interchange Format (basis for MARC)The U.S. National Z39.50 Profile for Library ApplicationsInternational Standard Serial Numbering (ISSN)Dublin Core Metadata Element SetSyntax for the Digital Object IdentifierThe OpenURL Framework for Context-Sensitive ServicesRanking of Authentication and Access Methods Available to the Metasearch EnvironmentNISO Metasearch XML Gateway Implementers GuideThe Standardized Usage Statistics Harvesting Initiative (SUSHI) ProtocolSERU: A Shared Electronic Resource UnderstandingKBART: Knowledge Bases and Related ToolsESPReSSO: Establishing Suggested Practices Regarding Single Sign-OnPhysical Delivery of Library ResourcesIOTA: OpenURL Quality MetricsERM Data Review: Gap Analysis ProjectI2 (Institutional Identifiers)PIE-J (Presentation & Identification of E-Journals)Standardized Markup for Journal Articles (JATS)Authoring and Interchange Framework for Adaptive XML Publishing Specification (DAISY)Specification for Web Resource Synchronization (ResourceSync)Journal Article Version (JAV) AddendumDemand-Driven Acquisition (DDA) of MonographsProtocol for Exchanging Serial Content (PESC)Open Access Metadata and IndicatorsOpen Discovery Initiative

NISO is the force behind

Definitions and Principles

Balance: no single interest category constitutes a majority of the membership / voting pool / working group: producer, user, general interest

4

Recommended PracticeStandard

Consensus: respond to all comments and make efforts to resolve negative votes, even if proposal is approved

Open process: allowing members and the community to have confidence in NISO standards.

OAMI

Considerations

• Value to be gained• Feasibility• Community(ies) affected• Stakeholders (Vested interests)• Participants required/desired• Timeframes

5

Typical RP Working Group phases

• Project is approved by Topic Committee & NISO Voting Members

• Group is assembled• Research/assembly period• Initial RP draft written• Public Review and Comment period• Working Group will address and potentially

incorporate Comments• NISO Approval• NISO Publication as a Recommended Practice

Today

• Presentation and Identification of E-Journals (PIE-J)

• Open Discovery Initiative (ODI)• Demand Driven Acquisition (DDA)• Open Access Metadata and Indicators (OAMI)

PIE-J RP

NOW AVAILABLE!

http://www.niso.org/workrooms/piej

Full 67 page Recommended Practice includes positive examples of each point listed and additional related Appendix materials.

PIE-J Recommended Practice

• Developed in order to provide guidance on the presentation of e-journals,

• particularly in the areas of title presentation, accurate use of ISSN, and citation practices,

• to publishers and platform providers to help end users accurately locate cited material as well as to solve some long-standing concerns of serials librarians

PIE-J Highlights

The recommended practice guidelines address the following:• Retention of title and citation information under which articles were

originally published• Display of title histories, including information relating to title changes and

related metadata• Display of correct ISSN for different formats and for changed titles• Retention and display of vital publication information across the history of

a journal, • including publisher names; clear numbering and dates; editors, editorial

boards, and sponsoring organizations; and frequency of publication• Graphic design and inclusion of information that allows easy access to • all content• Special considerations for retroactive digitization

Tri-fold Print Version: Electronic Version:

These are both two page brochures focused on the main points in the recommended practice

Representative Example

• One examples from the Appendix

• Clearly indicates the point being illustrated

• Links in the caption point to the relevant recommendation(s)

The Open Discovery Initiative

The context for ODI

• Emergence of Library Discovery Services solutions – Based on index of a wide range of content– Commercial and open access– Primary journal literature, ebooks, and more

• Adopted by thousands of libraries around the world, and impact millions of users

14

General Goals

• Define ways for libraries to assess the level of content providers’ participation in discovery services

• Help streamline the process by which content providers work with discovery service vendors

• Define models for “fair” linking from discovery services to publishers’ content

• Determine what usage statistics should be collected for libraries and for content providers

15

Subgroups

• Technical recommendations for data format and data transfer

• Communication of library’s rights/Descriptors regarding level of indexing

• Definition of fair linking• Exchange of usage data

16

Deliverables

• Vocabulary• NISO Recommended Practice– Data format and data transfer– Library rights to specific content– Level of indexing– Fair linking– Usage statistics

• Mechanisms to evaluate conformance with recommended practice

17

Demand-Driven Acquisition of Monographs

Working Group Goals

• Develop a flexible model for DDA that works for publishers, vendors, aggregators, and libraries

• Model should allow for DDA programs that:– Meet local budget and collection needs– Allow for consortial participation– Support cross-aggregator implementation– Account for how DDA impacts all functional areas

of the library

Recommendations

1. Establishing Goals2. Choosing Content to Make Available3. Choosing DDA Models4. Profiling5. Loading records6. Removing content7. Assessment8. Preservation9. Consortial DDA10. Public library DDA

Open Access Metadata and Indicators

Why is This Necessary?

Growth of OA + More Funder Mandates + Hybrids =

Lots of OA papers with different associated rights and responsibilities =

Confusion concerning who can do what when

Audience Segments

• Readers• Authors• Publishers• Funders• Search engines/discovery services• Academic Libraries

Working Group’s Objectives

1. A specified format for bibliographic metadata and possibly, a set of visual signals, describing the readership rights associated with a single scholarly work

2. Recommended mechanisms for publishing and distributing this metadata

3. A report on the feasibility of including clear information on downstream re-use rights within the current project and, if judged feasible, inclusion of these elements in outputs 1 and 2

4. A report stating how the adoption of these outputs would answer (or not) specific use cases to be developed by the Working Group

“open access” politically fraught

• Won’t use this labelFactual information:– Is a specified work free to read – can it be

accessed by anyone who has access to the Web?– What re-use rights are granted to this reader?

• Minimal set of metadata needed• Decided not to create/recommend a logo

<free_to_read> Tag

• Indicates content can be read or viewed by any user without payment or authentication

• Simple attribute of “yes” or “no” • Optional start and end dates to accommodate

embargoes, special offers, etc.

<free_to_read="no" start_date="2014-02-3” end_date=”2015-02-03"/><free_to_read="yes" start_date="2015-02-3”/>

• Content of this tag would include a stable identifier expressed as an HTTP URI

• URI would point to license terms that are human and/or machine readable

• Multiple URIs can be listed if article exists under specific license for certain period of time and then changes<license_ref start_date="2014-02-03">http://www.psychoceramics.org/license_v1.html</license_ref><license_ref start_date="2015-02-03">http://www.psychoceramics.org/open_license.html</license_ref>

<license_ref> Tag

Distributing Metadata

• Who? Publishers, aggregators, content providers

• Include the metadata in all standard metadata sets– Intended that this population/distribution will

become part of standard editorial and production workflows

• Could also include in alerts such as e-TOCs and RSS feeds and A&I feeds

Get involved!

• Subscribe to NISO NewslineSend an e-mail to newsline-subscribe@list.niso.org - put “Subscribe Newsline” in the subject line.

– see announcements of new efforts– read Working Group Connection

• Volunteer for Working Groups & Committees; Education Committee

• NISO Website• NISO Webinars, in-person Forums, & Open

Teleconferences – every month!• Standards Updates @ industry conferences

30

Thank you! Questions?